Sure, although we are now going to be off for a couple of weeks due to the break, we can try this. <br>Any one to suggest? <br><br>Also, one note: in our TO DO list, there has long been &quot;making the algorithms adaptive to wiki dynamics&quot;.&nbsp; In the current analysis of the Wikipedia, we have optimized the algorithms so that they work well on the Italian and French Wikipedias, and we have evaluated the performance on the English one as well.&nbsp; To get good results on Wikibooks, the coefficient in the current algorithms would need to be adapted, and that&#39;s quite a bit of work on our part.&nbsp; We are working towards self-adaptive algorithms, that would not require this sort of manual tuning, but that&#39;s a bit far off. 
<br><br>Odd as it may sound, it is at this point actually easier for us to make the analysis work for large wikipedias, than for smaller wikis!<br><br>Luca<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Dec 21, 2007 6:54 AM, mike.lifeguard
 &lt;<a href="mailto:mike.lifeguard@gmail.com">mike.lifeguard@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Is it possible to get some of English Wikibooks up as an experiment? If you
<br>recall, I was concerned about how our slow editing rate and small editor<br>community would impact the utility of this implicit system of rating. I&#39;d<br>also like to see how trust varies across modules of a book.<br>
<br>Thanks!<br>Mike.lifeguard (@en.wikibooks)<br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>Wikiquality-l mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Wikiquality-l@lists.wikimedia.org">Wikiquality-l@lists.wikimedia.org
</a><br><a href="http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiquality-l" target="_blank">http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiquality-l</a><br><br></blockquote></div><br>